PatsBoy12
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2009
- Messages
- 16,502
- Reaction score
- 10,026
For all the talk about letting Welker go, I think Woodhead was the bigger loss.
I have a feeling that Woodhead wanted to move on because he knew the Pats wanted to spotlight Vereen and his touches here were likely to go down. I think the Chargers offered him a big role and that is why he left. Just a guess, but I think this may be a case that the player saw greener pastures elsewhere even though the Pats wanted him back.
I said this from DAY 1. I never backed down from that position even when people thought I was crazy (not this board). I was especially upset when I saw the $ figure. It was so modest. That is why I feel they extended him so quickly (well . . . aside from his great production). I watched a few SD games just to see him and found myself so frustrated when I watched him make plays in both the run and pass games (just like his time here). He held the running game together when Mathews went down with his annual injury. He was at times arguably their best offensive players. Heck, I can remember games in NE when he was arguably the best offensive player. He especially seemed to shine in the really big games. He continued to do it last season for SD. He deserves the extension.
With all that said, I do believe Vereen can be better is almost all aspects (not there yet), except for maybe rushing (aside from durability), where Woodhead was consistently a surprisingly effective rusher. Vereen has shown it at times, but I don't feel he's consistent yet. That could be largely due to how the Pats use him primarily as a pass catcher, though. I would like to see him carry the ball between the tackles at times, if only to keep the D off balance. They definitely should not, nor do I believe they will, use him between the tackles too often, but I feel a few attempts in spots would be good for keeping the opposing D from keying in on the pass.